3 ms·
Because the term Scrum Master wasn't derived from master/slave. Git's concept of a master branch was borrowed from BitKeeper which used master/slave terminolog
by simonw 1y ago
Because the term Scrum Master wasn't derived from master/slave.
Git's concept of a master branch was borrowed from BitKeeper which used master/slave terminology. https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/HOWTO.ask#L223 https://github.com/bitkeeper-scm/bitkeeper/blob/master/doc/H...
- ret2plt 1y agoEh, that's some interesting historical trivia, but I don't see how that matters tbh. If everybody is fine with the word because they (quite reasonably) assume it was inspired by master record or something similar, and you bring up some 25 year old history (20 years when the debate got started) about not even git but a precursor, does that really help with anything? I am sure there are other innocuous seeming words that have a dark etymology, should we go search for them so we can update the language?
- pseudalopex 1y ago> If everybody is fine with the word Some people weren't evidently.
- simonw 1y agoThe question was "How did Scrum Master escape this treatment?" - I think I answered that question accurately.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- armitron 1y agoYou're implying that those who are throwing hissy fits about "master" are aware of bitkeeper documentation and their (wildly unchecked) emotional response to this matter is nuanced enough to take "provenance" of technical terms into account. Do you even realize how ridiculous these nonsensical "arguments" sound?
- simonw 1y agoWhat's your theory as to why Git master had a lot of support for changing it while Scrum master did not?